JUDGMENT :

Kalyan Rai Surana, J.

1. Heard Mr. I. Chowdhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.N. Goswami, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

2. The challenge in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is the order dated 20.09.2016, passed by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Excise Department (respondent no. 2). By the said order, it was held that the enquiry report submitted by the State Enquiry Officer, Assam was not satisfactory and it was communicated that the Governor of Assam considers that an enquiry officer should be appointed to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner and accordingly, a different enquiry officer as well as Presenting Officer were appointed respectively.

3. In brief, the case of the petitioner as projected in the writ petition is that at the relevant time, he was posted as Deputy Superintendent of Excise, Cachar, he was allowed to hold charge of Superintendent of Excise, temporarily vide order dated 22.4.2014 and 26.5.2014, till posting of a regular incumbent. On 19.7.2014, the Treasury Officer, Cachar reported that huge amount